Vinoth v. The Sub Inspector of Police,

ORDER

¶1The prayer in the Criminal Original Petition is to quash the final report in C.C.No. 287 of 2025 on the file of learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallipet. Even though notice served on the 2nd respondent, he has not chosen to appear before this Court.

¶2Upon considering the arguments of learned counsel for petitioner and the learned Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) and perusing the material records of the case, the gist of allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was giving money to the drama troupe, who played drama in their village. While so, the de facto complainant came to that spot and confronted him why he is separately giving money and money has to be given in common by the villagers, at that point of time, the accused said to have abused him in a filthy language and also threatened him. In view thereof, the case has been registered and after investigation, the final report is filed for the offence under Sec.296(b), 351(2) of B.N.S. Page3 of 5

¶3Considering the very statement of L.W.1 as well as the final report, it can be seen that the words spoken by the petitioner are in a state of anger and frustration and is not lascivious and does not appear to deprive the interests of the people and does not have the tendency to deprive and corrupt the minds of the people, as such it would not constitute an offence of obscenity punishable under Section 294 (b) I.P.C. as per the dictum of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Mani @ Subramaniam versus State (CDJ 2026 SC 1170). Similarly, the threat which is said to be made must be with an intention to cause serious alarm in the person threatened in order to deter him from doing something lawful or compel him to do something unlawful and in the background of the case and the overall circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that the threat given by him will be an offence under Section 351(2) of B.N.S. Reference in this regard can be made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and Naresh Aneja @ Naresh Kumar Aneja vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another (2025 2 SCC 604).

¶4At this juncture, they learned Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) would submit that there is also a counter case. But, neither the 2nd respondent is present nor any application has been filed in respect thereof. As and when any application is made in respect thereof, the same shall be considered with reference to that case. In view thereof, this Criminal Original Page4 of 5 Petition deserves to be allowed and accordingly allowed by quashing the proceedings in CC No.287 of 2025 on the file of learned District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallipet. Consequently, connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 30-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order RPP To

¶1The District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallipet.

¶2The Sub Inspector of Police, R.K.Pet Police Station, R.K.Pett, Tiruvallur District.

¶3The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras. CRLoOPoNo.o9422oofo2026 D.BHARATHAoCHAKRAVARTHYoJ. RPP CRLoOPoNo.o9422oofo2026 AND CRLoMPoNO.o6655oOFo2026,CRLoMPoNO.o6656oOFo2026 30-07-2026 Page5oofo5

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY AND CRL MP NO. 6655 OF 2026,CRL MP NO. 6656 OF 2026 Vinoth No.1/79, Nookalamman Kovil Street, Paivalasa Village, R.K.Pett Taluk, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur, Tamil Nadu. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Sub Inspector of Police, R.K.Pet Police Station, R.K.Pett, Tiruvallur District. Crime No.54 of 2025 2. E.Punniyakotti S/o.Ethirajm, NO.91, Nookalamman Kovil Street, Paivalasa Village, R.K.Pett Taluk, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur, Tamil Nadu. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER Criminal Original Petition filed under Sec.528 of B.N.S.S. 2023, praying to call for the records and quash the impugned charge sheet in CC.No.287/2025 on the file of the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Pallipet, arising out of Crime No.54/2025 on the file of the R.K.Pet Police Station, Tiruvallur District. Page2 of 5 For Petitioner(s): Mr. P.R.Thiruneelakandan For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Rajasekaran, Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) for R1 R2 – No appearance